Talk:Amor Vincit Omnia (Caravaggio): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
it is perfectly possible for a boy of 11-12 to display the level of musculature that is shown, provided the boy exercises or engages in manual labor fairly regularly. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.206.200.51|12.206.200.51]] ([[User talk:12.206.200.51|talk]]) 04:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
it is perfectly possible for a boy of 11-12 to display the level of musculature that is shown, provided the boy exercises or engages in manual labor fairly regularly. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.206.200.51|12.206.200.51]] ([[User talk:12.206.200.51|talk]]) 04:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
As someone who has observed the male form quite a bit, I must agree with the original comment. A 12 year old can indeed be muscular but the shape of those muscles, and more noticibly his frame, looks more like someone 17 or 18. The pubic hair was left out as was the custom in classical art. I can't help noticing the face is one of a mischevious child. It reminds me of the boy on Two and a Half Men. I would imagine, this child could have been known to Carovaggio, and his face was put in this picture either as a form of admiration of a favorite or to embarass a troublemaker. If |
As someone who has observed the male form quite a bit, I must agree with the original comment. A 12 year old can indeed be muscular but the shape of those muscles, and more noticibly his frame, looks more like someone 17 or 18. The pubic hair was left out as was the custom in classical art. I can't help noticing the face is one of a mischevious child. It reminds me of the boy on Two and a Half Men. I would imagine, this child could have been known to Carovaggio, and his face was put in this picture either as a form of admiration of a favorite or to embarass a troublemaker. If indeed we can tell anything from his facial expression, he doesn't look like someone who would pose for a painting, something I personally found difficult to do for even a few minutes. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/130.132.223.22|130.132.223.22]] ([[User talk:130.132.223.22|talk]]) 15:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Revision as of 15:37, 7 May 2008
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Visual arts Start‑class | ||||||
|
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | LGBT studies Start‑class | ||||||
|
Name
The perceived English name is Amor Victorious where the name is more literally translated as Love Victorious Over All. How should we deal with this in the article? --Oldak Quill 18:33, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Re-written
I've re-written this entry to make it more complete - part of a personal project to write articles on all of Caravaggio's work. I've tried to include the information already in the original where appropriate, but there were some errors in the first version, especially in the last paragraph, that I had to fix. (For example, it wasn't a 'local bishop' who commissioned Baglione's painting, it was Vincezo Giustiniani's own brother, Cardinal B. Giustiniani, and he wasn't at all displeased with the Caravaggio piece).
There's obviously a problem with the name of this painting - I believe it's commonly called Amor Vincit, which translates as 'Love Conquers' or possibly 'Love the Conqueror'; in English this seems to turn into a whole train of possible titles. The real problem is simply how to ensure that anyone searching for it in Wiki, can find it.
There are some red links to other Caravaggio paintings - they'll turn blue as I get other articles up.
PiCo 02:15, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Latin mistakes
Edited the following mistakes:
The quote does not come from the Aeneid, but from Virgil's Eclogues. The second half of the translation has also been added. Also, latin quotes should always appear in italics rather than between quotation marks. CaveatLector 08:18, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Excellent article, question about model
I have trouble conceiving how a boy could have a muscular body like that depicted in the painting. I assumed that maybe a child's face was used, and an adult or near-adult used for the body. Then again I'm a lesbian so I can't say I know much about the male body. - Cyborg Ninja 03:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
it is perfectly possible for a boy of 11-12 to display the level of musculature that is shown, provided the boy exercises or engages in manual labor fairly regularly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.206.200.51 (talk) 04:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
As someone who has observed the male form quite a bit, I must agree with the original comment. A 12 year old can indeed be muscular but the shape of those muscles, and more noticibly his frame, looks more like someone 17 or 18. The pubic hair was left out as was the custom in classical art. I can't help noticing the face is one of a mischevious child. It reminds me of the boy on Two and a Half Men. I would imagine, this child could have been known to Carovaggio, and his face was put in this picture either as a form of admiration of a favorite or to embarass a troublemaker. If indeed we can tell anything from his facial expression, he doesn't look like someone who would pose for a painting, something I personally found difficult to do for even a few minutes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.132.223.22 (talk) 15:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)